On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know the GIS stuff is bound to 2.4+, but other than this, is there > any particularly compelling reason to drop 2.3 support other than the > annoyance factor for 1.1? I'm just not convinced that the first minor > release after a major 1.0 release is the right time to do it.
Mostly it's the annoyance factor, but I think it goes a bit further than "annoyance" -- there's a *lot* of places where we have to work around 2.3 problems. It'd simplify quite a few nasty spots to be able to factor 2.3 out. The reason we have to do it at *some* time is it's really the first step towards Python 3.0 compatibility. We really won't be able to go 2.3+ ---> 3.0 all the way in one fell swoop, so we'll need to work up to it. In my experiments it seemed that going 2.5 -> 3.0 is pretty painless (the work Martin van Lowis did can be adapted easily to support both 2.5, 2.6, and 3.0, but not earlier). So we need to start down the road of deprecating older versions in preparation for an eventual move to 3.0. Of course, we're talking a timeline measured in years here, but the road start now. Jacob --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
